alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[House Report 106-654]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     106-654

======================================================================

 
 PROVIDING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3605, THE SAN RAFAEL WESTERN 
             LEGACY DISTRICT AND NATIONAL CONSERVATION ACT

                                _______
                                

June 6, 2000.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Hastings of Washington, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 516]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 516, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                summary of provisions of the resolution

    The resolution provides for the consideration of H.R. 3605, 
the San Rafael Western Legacy District and National 
Conservation Act, under an open rule. The rule provides one 
hour of general debate divided equally between the chairman and 
ranking minority member of the Committee on Resources.
    The rule waives all points of order against consideration 
of the bill. The rule makes in order the Committee on Resources 
amendment in the nature of a substitute, now printed in the 
bill, as an original bill for the purpose of amendment, which 
shall be open for amendment at any point.
    The rule provides that the amendment printed in this report 
shall be considered as read and shall not be subject to a 
demand for a division of the question in the House or in the 
Committee of the Whole.
    The rule allows the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole 
to postpone votes during consideration of the bill and to 
reduce voting time to five minutes on a postponed question if 
the vote follows a fifteen minute vote. Members who have 
preprinted their amendments in the Record prior to their 
consideration will be given priority in recognition to offer 
their amendments if otherwise consistent with House rules. 
Finally, the rule provides for one motion to recommit, with or 
without instructions.

           summary of amendment made in order under the rule

    Hansen: Manager's amendment. Specifies the boundaries of 
the Legacy District.

                    text of amendment made in order

 1. An Amendment To Be Offered by Representative Hansen of Utah, or a 
                                Designee

    In section 101(b), strike ``2,842,800'' and insert 
``2,859,100''.
    In section 101(b), strike ``dated'' and all that follows 
through the period and insert ``dated March 24, 2000.''.
    In section 201(b), strike ``947,000'' and insert 
``958,600''.
    In section 201(b), strike ``dated'' and all that follows 
through the first period and insert ``dated March 24, 2000.''.

                                  

```
# Sheet1

&"Arial,Bold"Part 1SUPPLEMENT		&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2023 ReportingSection VII

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2023-11	&"Arial,Bold"&K000000VII VSR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"September 2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

712 

TP 12-00139 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, AND LINDLEY, JJ.

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF SURF CITY ENTERPRISES OF 

SYRACUSE, INC., PETITIONER,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

 

NEW YORK STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY, RESPONDENT. 

 

SCICCHITANO & PINSKY, PLLC, SYRACUSE (BRADLEY M. PINSKY OF COUNSEL),

FOR PETITIONER. 

MARK D. FRERING, NEW YORK STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY, ALBANY, FOR

RESPONDENT. 

 

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to the

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial

Department by order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County [Brian F.

DeJoseph, J.], entered January 11, 2012) to review a determination of

respondent. The determination imposed a civil penalty against

petitioner. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the determination is unanimously

confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed. 

Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding

seeking to annul the determination that it violated Alcoholic Beverage

Control Law § 65 (1) (selling alcohol to minors), 9 NYCRR 48.2

(conduct of licensed premises) and 9 NYCRR 48.3 (conformance with

local and other regulations). Contrary to the contention of

petitioner, we conclude that the determination that it violated

Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 (1) and 9 NYCRR 48.2 is supported

by substantial evidence (see generally Matter of Shorts Bar of

Rochester Inc. v New York State Liq. Auth., 17 AD3d 1101, 1102). 

Several law enforcement officers who participated in the raid of

petitioner’s establishment testified at the hearing that they observed

numerous underage patrons consuming alcohol, and the record includes

several supporting depositions of underage patrons who admitted

consuming alcohol on the premises (see Matter of JMH, Inc. v New York

State Liq. Auth., 61 AD3d 1260, 1262). We do not address petitioner’s

contention that the admissions were obtained in violation of the

patrons’ constitutional rights inasmuch as petitioner lacks standing

to raise that contention (cf. People v Wesley, 73 NY2d 351, 355; see

generally Warth v Seldin, 422 US 490, 498-500; Tileston v Ullman, 318

US 44, 46). 
-2- 712 

TP 12-00139 

We further conclude that the determination that petitioner

violated 9 NYCRR 48.3 by employing unlicensed security guards in

violation of state regulations is supported by substantial evidence

(see generally Shorts Bar of Rochester, 17 AD3d at 1102). 

Petitioner’s contention with respect to that charge concerns the

resolution of conflicting testimony, and it is well established that

the findings of an Administrative Law Judge that turn on the

credibility of witnesses are entitled to great weight (see Matter of

Grossberg v Christian, 245 AD2d 118; see also Matter of Café La China

Corp. v New York State Liq. Auth., 43 AD3d 280, 281). We see no basis

to disturb those findings.

Entered: June 8, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
----

Action brought on 5 September 2006 — Cabrera Sánchez v OHIM — Industrias Cárnicas Valle (El charcutero artesano)

(Case T-242/06)

(2006/C 261/48)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Miguel Cabrera Sánchez (Móstoles, Spain) (represented by: J. A. Calderón Chavero and T. Villate Consonni, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Industrias Cárnicas Valle SA

Form of order sought

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Industrias Cárnicas Valle SA

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative colour mark EL CHARCUTERO ARTESANO (Application No 2 823 193) for goods in Class 29

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: National figurative mark (No 2 047 511) EL CHARCUTERO for goods in Class 29

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition and registration of the mark applied for

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Pleas in law: Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark

----
# sec5_balsh_2023

&"Arial,Bold"&10Bulletin No. 2022-12	&"Arial,Bold"&10V BS - &P	&"Arial,Bold"&10June 2022
#### Rickey J. SHEPARD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Doug CATOE, Director of South Carolina Department of Corrections; Rickie Harrison, Warden; Stanley Burtt, Associate Warden; Barbara Skeen, Director of Medical Services; NFN Cooke, Nurse Supervisor, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 01-6460.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 31, 2001.

Decided June 11, 2001.

Rickey J. Shepard, pro se. Vinton De-Vane Lide, Vinton D. Lide & Associates, Lexington, SC, for appellees.

Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Rickey Shepard, a state inmate, appeals the district court’s order dismissing for failure to state a claim his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. *See Shepard v. Catoe,*No. CA-99-3107-7-19-BG (D.S.C. Feb. 28, 2001). We further deny Shepard’s motion to compel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WALTER V. LUCAS, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0586 GEB CMK P

vs.

B. ARNOLD, 

Defendant. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has requested the appointment of counsel. The United States Supreme

Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent indigent

prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298 (1989). In

certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of counsel

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991);

Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the court

does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff’s request for the appointment of

counsel will therefore be denied.

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00586-CMK Document 66 Filed 07/14/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s June 22, 2006 request

for the appointment of counsel is denied.

DATED: July 13, 2006.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

/luca 04cv0586.31

Case 2:04-cv-00586-CMK Document 66 Filed 07/14/06 Page 2 of 2
# sec5_balsht_2017

&L&"Arial"&10&BBulletin No. 2017-16	&"Arial,Bold"&10V BS - &P	&R&"Arial"&10&BDecember 2017
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 27, 2010

p0920 

# Order

September 27, 2010

141424

ASAMA COLDWATER MANUFACTURING, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 141424 COA: 290584 Court of Claims: 08-000054-MT DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 8, 2010 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MICHAEL BURTON, : CIVIL ACTION

Petitioner, :

:

v. : NO: 2:05-CV- 4872

:

GERALD ROZUM, et. al., :

Respondent. :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 24th day of March, 2006, upon consideration of the Petitioner Michael

Burton’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. No.1), and after careful review of the Report

and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas J. Rueter (Doc. No. 10), it is

hereby ORDERED that:

 1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and Adopted.

 2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED.

 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this matter for statistical purposes.

BY THE COURT:

/S/LEGROME D. DAVIS

LEGROME D. DAVIS, J

Case 2:05-cv-04872-LDD Document 14 Filed 03/27/06 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3946 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3946

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 1106 Main Street in Bastrop, Texas, as the ``Sergeant Major Billy D. 
                          Waugh Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 14, 2024

 Mr. Cruz (for himself and Mr. Cornyn) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 1106 Main Street in Bastrop, Texas, as the ``Sergeant Major Billy D. 
                          Waugh Post Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SERGEANT MAJOR BILLY D. WAUGH POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 1106 Main Street in Bastrop, Texas, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Sergeant Major Billy D. Waugh Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Sergeant 
Major Billy D. Waugh Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 10(t) 

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

        This Employment Agreement is madeand entered into on February 13, 2004 (the “Effective Date”) by and betweenLane Furniture Industries, Inc., a Mississippi corporation (“Lane”) and RandallC. Spak (“Executive”).  

**        WHEREAS,  **Executive is now andhas been employed by Lane in senior management executive positions and is broadlyexperienced in all facets of Lane’s operations; and  

**        WHEREAS,  **it is in the bestinterests of Lane to assure that it will have the continued dedication of Executive;  

**        NOW THEREFORE,  ** for good andvaluable consideration and in order to induce Executive to remain in the employ of Lane,the parties covenant and agree as follows:  

    **1.**    **Definitions.   **The following terms shall have the following meanings for                    purposes of this Agreement.
S. 3960 

One Hundred Eighteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty four 

An Act 

To amend title 35, United States Code, to provide a good faith exception to the 

imposition of fines for false assertions and certifications, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. GOOD FAITH EXCEPTION TO THE IMPOSITION OF CERTAIN 

FINES. 

Title 35, United States Code, is amended— 

(1) in section 41(j), by inserting ‘‘, unless the entity shows 

that the assertion was made in good faith,’’ before ‘‘be subject’’; 

and 

(2) in section 123(f), by inserting ‘‘, unless the entity shows 

that the certification was made in good faith,’’ before ‘‘be subject’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

TRAVEL GROUP, INC., D/B/A REPUBLIC AIR TRAVEL 

AND SCOT SPENCER 

AIRLIFT GROUP, INC. 

AND RICHARD BERNARD 

Unauthorized Air Transportation, 

Unfair and Deceptive Practices and Unfair Methods of 

Competition, and Violations of Public Charter Rules 

EXPRESS ONE INTERNATIONAL, INC. 

Unfair and Deceptive Practices and Unfair Methods of 

Competition, and Violations of Public Charter Rules 

Enforcement Proceeding 

. ;·. ____ , 

. '' -- ; ,j "; j 

DOT-OST-1995-272 

formerly Docket 49233 

STATUS REPORT AND NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL 

The Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and 

Proceedings ("Enforcement Office"), pursuant to Your Honor's March 22,2006, Order 

staying this proceeding, files this report detailing the current status of this proceeding and 

settlement negotiations. 

The Department has not ruled on the outstanding motions filed by Respondents 

and opposed by the Enforcement Office in Ascend Aviation Group, Docket OST-2004-

17486. 
2 

There have been no further settlement discussions. 

In addition, due to the retirement of prior counsel, Mr. William J. Wagner, the 

Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings has assigned as substitute counsel Mr. 

Vinh Q. Nguyen, Senior Trial Attorney, and Ms. Lisa Swafford-Brooks, Chief, Aviation 

Licensing Compliance Branch, to serve as his substitute. 

Date: January 31, 2013 

Respectfully submitted, 

) 

Samuel Podberesky · 

Assistant General Counsel for 

Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings 

United States Department of Transportation 

Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Room 96-429 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: 202-366-9342 

FAX: 202-366-7152 
3 

Docket No. DOT-OST-1995-272 

I hereby certify that on this 31th day of January, 2013, a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing Status Report was served in the following manner to the following: 

Original 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Operations, M-30 

West Building Ground Floor 

Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

By First Class Mail 

The Honorable Ronnie A. Yoder 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

TEL: (202) 366-2142 

FAX: (202) 366-7536 

By First Class Mail 

Scot Spencer 

SBD Aircraft Services 

25 5 S Leland Norton Way 

Sam Bernardino, CA 92408
Ninth Amendment to Employment Agreement



 Exhibit 10.1 
 NINTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 This Ninth Amendment to Employment Agreement is made and entered into as of
March 1, 2008, by and between PriceSmart, Inc., a Delaware Corporation (“Employer”) and John Hildebrandt (“Executive”). 
 Recitals 
  

	A)	On June 1, 2001 an Employment Agreement was made and entered into by and between Employer and Executive. 

  

	B)	Said Employment Agreement has been amended on eight prior occasions; 

  

	C)	Employer and Executive now desire to further amend the Employment Agreement, as set forth hereinbelow: 

 Agreement 
  

	1.	Section 3.1 of the Agreement which provides: 

 3.1
Term. The term of Executive’s employment hereunder shall commence on June 1, 2001 and shall continue until March 31, 2008 unless sooner terminated or extended as hereinafter provided. 
 is hereby amended, effective March 1, 2008, to provide as follows: 
 3.1 Term. The term of Executive’s employment hereunder shall commence on June 1, 2001 and shall continue until March 31, 2009 unless sooner terminated or extended as hereinafter provided.









	2.	All other terms of the Employment Agreement, as amended, shall remain unaltered and fully effective. 

 Executed in San Diego, California, as of the date first written above. 
  

							
	EXECUTIVE	 		 	EMPLOYER
			
		 		 	PRICESMART, INC.
				
	John Hildebrandt	 		 	By:	 	 /S/ JOSE LUIS LAPARTE

	 /S/ JOHN HILDEBRANDT
	 		 	Name:	 	Jose Luis Laparte
		 		 	Its:	 	President
----

----

I Informace

Komise

----

Sdělení Komise v rámci provádění směrnice Evropského parlamentu a Rady 2004/22/ES ze dne 31. března 2004 o měřicích přístrojích (1)

(Zveřejnění odkazů na normativní dokumenty zpracované OIML a seznamu částí těchto dokumentů, které odpovídají základním požadavkům (v souladu s čl. 16 odst. 1 uvedené směrnice))

(2006/C 269/01)

(Text s významem pro EHP)

MI-001:   Vodoměry

ve vztahu k:

MI-004:   Měřiče tepla

ve vztahu k:

MI-005:   Měřicí systémy pro kontinuální a dynamické měření množství kapalin jiných než voda

ve vztahu k:

MI-006, KAPITOLA II:   Dávkovací váhy s automatickou činností

ve vztahu k:

MI-006, KAPITOLA III:   Gravimetrické plnicí váhy s automatickou činností

ve vztahu k:

MI-006, KAPITOLA IV:   Diskontinuální součtové váhy

ve vztahu k:

MI-006, KAPITOLA V:   Kontinuální součtové váhy

ve vztahu k:

MI-006, KAPITOLA VI:   Kolejové váhy s automatickou činností

ve vztahu k:

MI-008, KAPITOLA II:   Odměrné nádoby

ve vztahu k:

MI-009, KAPITOLA II:   Přístroje pro měření délky

ve vztahu k:

MI-009, KAPITOLA III:   Přístroje pro měření plochy

ve vztahu k:

(Pozn.: OIML R136-1 se týká pouze určení plochy kůže, zatímco MI 009 se neomezuje jen na kůži.)

MI-009, KAPITOLA IV:   Přístroje pro vícerozměrová měření

ve vztahu k:

MI-010:   Analyzátory výfukových plynů

ve vztahu k:

----

(1)Úř. věst. L 135, 30.4.2004.

----
EXHIBIT 32.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S. C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of RTG Ventures, Inc. (the
"Company") for the annual period ended August 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Linda
Perry, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:


     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) of
          15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.




Date: May 15, 2007                         /s/ Linda Perry
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Linda Perry,
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
                                           (Principal Executive Officer)
Before the Second Division,

April 20, 1960

No. 64094.

protests 58/23114 and58/23117 (Galveston).

#### Universal Marion Corporation *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protests were dismissed.